From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33263) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ScFYG-0004CE-Ch for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 08:41:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ScFYB-0003L6-Dd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 08:41:27 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64806) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ScFYB-0003Kw-5D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 08:41:23 -0400 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q56CfLg1029836 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 6 Jun 2012 08:41:21 -0400 Message-ID: <4FCF4FEF.3090005@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 14:41:19 +0200 From: Kevin Wolf MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1338937810-24681-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> <4FCF0EAD.2010405@redhat.com> <4FCF49D5.6060409@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4FCF49D5.6060409@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Two small fixes to the streaming test case. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am 06.06.2012 14:15, schrieb Paolo Bonzini: > >> A real patch series is preferable, having the patches as part of your >> signature makes quoting them a bit harder with Thunderbird... > > Oops. Unintended, sorry. > >>> From 644fda4d6da1a5babfc8884f255d87ebaf847616 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>> From: Paolo Bonzini >>> Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 13:07:56 +0200 >>> Subject: [PATCH 1/2] qemu-iotests: fill streaming test image with data >>> >>> This avoids that the job completes too fast when the file system >>> reports the hole to QEMU (via FIEMAP or SEEK_HOLE). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini >> >> Does this really fix the cause or just a symptom? The commit message >> sounds like a race and now we happen to win it again. But maybe it's >> just a bad wording that gives the impression. > > No, unfortunately that's exactly the case. The whole TestStreamStop > test case is racy. > > If the job completes before we can cancel it, it fails. If we remove > the sleep the job will be canceled before it has even started, and the > test succeeds but I'm not sure it is testing anything worthwhile. > > But if the image is left sparse, then the job has really nothing to do > except reading one L2-table. You're pretty much guaranteed to complete > the job too soon, and the test fails. Ah, you're talking about the cases where we cancel, this wasn't quite clear and so I looked at the wrong tests. Thanks for the explanations, the patches make sense to me now. Can you resend a v2 as an actual patch series and use that opportunity to make the commit messages a bit more detailed? Kevin